Boycotting is arguably effective: A boycott "hits the company and its stockholders where it really hurts," says Chris Churchill in the Albany, N.Y., Times-Union. If enough people take their business elsewhere, maybe BP will get the message and "act more responsibly and carefully in the future." At least it will help consumers feel like they’re "doing something to make their helplessness and anger known.""Should consumers boycott BP?"

A BP boycott may be emotionally satisfying, but it's futile: Before you boycott BP, says Sharon Begley in Newsweek, "pick which malefactor or criminal — environmental or human — you’d like to support when you gas up." Exxon, which was responsible for the Exxon Valdez spill in 1989? Texaco, which is being sued for contaminating groundwater in Ecuador? Or maybe Citgo, which is in the clutches of Venezuelan "petro-dictator" Hugo Chavez. An oil boycott, you see, is "emotionally satisfying but ultimately futile," because it only diverts business to companies that have their own shortcomings."Boycott BP!"

Punishing BP could make matters worse: If enough people shun BP gas stations and take their business elsewhere, the company could start "losing money to the point where it could not fund the clean-up," says John C. Ogg in 24/7 Wall St. If you want to punish BP, be patient. There will be plenty of time to let the oil giant know how you feel after the underwater oil gusher is plugged, and BP has paid the bill for mopping up the Gulf of Mexico."The dangers of a BP boycott today rather than tomorrow"